We CAN make the cap room to sign Peppers - Unsubstantianted Claim

[MoLewisrocks]

The total amount of SALARY in 2009 for these three players is over $12M.

Removing amortized cap hits from 2009 is neither necessary nor possible.

Money guaranteed after _2012_ reverts to the capped year. 2010 money is not affected.

Read what you posted...

We can free up an extra $9M if we restructure/extend Brady, Light and Faulk so that their cap hit in 2009 is $1M each. We could use huge guaranteed options due in 2010 for each to make them whole.

By and large machinations to circumcent the cap are just that.

 

[Shockt327]

Can someone just please tell me when Peppers has said he wants to be the highest paid defensive player and get a contract like haynesworth. I keep seeing analysts use this as their justification for why he wouldn't fit with the Pats, yet I've never seen him quoted as saying such. I've heard him say that he wants to be in a 3-4 defense to maximize his potential (which doesn't necessarily mean contract). If he was all about the money, I'd have to think he'd take that 16 mm franchise tender, rather than just let it sit there, esp since he's limited his choices to 4 teams (3 of which are in the NFC).

Again, Haynesworth isn't making that much.

His record breaking contract is only costing the Skins $7mil against the cap this year, $8.8 in 2010, and $10.6 in 2011.

Peppers is NOT signing a long term deal at $7M/season.

He's got nearly $17M coming to him for just a single season if he signs the franchise Tender.

He's going to want compensation in the form of long term guarantees for every penny of that $16.7M he gives back.

Maybe he gives New England a discount, but I think $7M is insane. His agent should insist on resigning before he agrees to that deal.

How is it "insane"?

Again, Haynesworth's contract isn't netting him that much. It's really only a four-year deal worth $48 million. And Peppers didn't have the year/hype that Haynesworth did. Also Peppers isn't a UFA like Haynesworth was so he can't just go where the money is. He's bound to a team that has ammo to trade for him. He's going to have to compromise.

 

[solman]

Maybe it would be insane, but it would be equally insane for Peppers to ask to be traded to a team that will convert him to 3-4 OLB and expect to be paid much more than the top LBs. He's done nothing to justify that, and if he wants to be a LB then he will need to accept being paid as one, not as a DE.

The Ravens franchised Terrell Suggs for a second time at $10.2M, a 20% increase on his previous salary, which was a compromise between the LB and DE positions. So a long-term deal averaging $10M/year tops seems to me not unreasonable.

Again, Peppers can either go for top dollar or go for playing 3-4 OLB to a team of his choice. It's extremely unlikely that he will get both. So far, going for top dollar doesn't seem to be what's driving him since he hasn't signed the $16.7M tender from Carolina, and previously turned down a lucrative long term deal from them.

I'm sure his agent will take the hefty commission on whatever lucrative deal Peppers ends up with rather than resign in protest.

1. I don't see Peppers coming here and demanding to be an OLB. He is an amazing athlete who can be used in a variety of ways. BB is the master of using players like this. Some times he start on the line. Sometimes he'll start like an OLB. Sometimes you won't even see him until he is crushing you into the ground.

2. Agents would absolutely resign before signing a bad deal. if they do a bad deal, it hurts their ability to negotiate contracts for other players, and it hurts their ability to sign other players.

Tom Condon refused to sign a six year rookie deal for Ben Watson. He walked away from the deal and his commission rather than be associated with a willingness to do six year deals for first round draft picks.

He's got enough other clients for me to imagine this being a very good decision for him.

 

[solman]

Again, Haynesworth isn't making that much.

His record breaking contract is only costing the Skins $7mil against the cap this year, $8.8 in 2010, and $10.6 in 2011.

How is it "insane"?

Again, Haynesworth's contract isn't netting him that much. It's really only a four-year deal worth $48 million. And Peppers didn't have the year/hype that Haynesworth did. Also Peppers isn't a UFA like Haynesworth was so he can't just go where the money is. He's bound to a team that has ammo to trade for him. He's going to have to compromise.

Haynesworth is in line to make $16.7M in 2009. Then he is free to negotiate a long term deal in an uncapped year (baring injury etc.).

He is not going to sign a new deal unless his expected compensation is greater than:

$16.7M
PLUS his expected compensation from the long term deal signed in 2010
MINUS a discount because something bad could happen to him or his prospects during 2009
MINUS a discount because playing for the Patriots is just so awesome.

If he gets $7M/year for seven years, that translates to an additional $5.4M/year over the last six years of the contract above and beyond the $16.7M he is already in line to get. Presumably not all of that would be guaranteed.

That's probably a 50% discount or more off of his reasonable expectations.

 

[ctpatsfan77]

We can free up an extra $9M if we restructure/extend Brady, Light and Faulk so that their cap hit in 2009 is $1M each. We could use huge guaranteed options due in 2010 for each to make them whole.

No, you can't, because option/roster bonuses in the uncapped year count against the last capped year (LCY).

Compensation which is treated as a signing bonus explicitly exempted from this limit.

A guaranteed option bonus is treated as a signing bonus, even if its convertible.

(There is a provision prohibiting the team from exercising such a conversion if it puts them in violation of the 30% rule. I don't know if this would be determined on a prospective or retrospective basis. But even if it is retrospective it wouldn't prevent the move discussed here, merely complicate it).

Prospective. The Rams' contract to Jason Brown was disallowed because a buyback could have put them in violation of the 30% rule.

The total amount of SALARY in 2009 for these three players is over $12M.

Removing amortized cap hits from 2009 is neither necessary nor possible.

Money guaranteed after _2012_ reverts to the capped year. 2010 money is not affected.

Only if the 2009 money is fully guaranteed.

I really don't see the problem here. Just cut Brady. Then the Patriots can have the bestest defense in the whole world.

Maybe it would be insane, but it would be equally insane for Peppers to ask to be traded to a team that will convert him to 3-4 OLB and expect to be paid much more than the top LBs. He's done nothing to justify that, and if he wants to be a LB then he will need to accept being paid as one, not as a DE.

+1.

Salary:

2009: $1M
2010: $1.3M
2011: $1.6M
2012: $1.9M
2013: $2.2M
2014: $2.5M

2010 guaranteed option bonus: $100M

If I understand the CBA correctly, such a bonus would be treated as a signing bonus in 2009.

 

[solman]

No, you can't, because option/roster bonuses in the uncapped year count against the last capped year (LCY).

On what basis do you make this claim?

The Haynesworth deal is an obvious counter example.

There is a provision that requires guaranteed money paid after 2012 to be counted against the 2009 cap. Is that what is causing the confusion?

If I understand the CBA correctly, such a bonus would be treated as a signing bonus in 2009.

Which part of the CBA is your understanding based on?

 

[Ring 6]

Salary:

2009: $1M
2010: $1.3M
2011: $1.6M
2012: $1.9M
2013: $2.2M
2014: $2.5M

2010 guaranteed option bonus: $100M

Annual cap hit:

2009: $1M
2010: $21.3M
2011: $21.6M
2012: $21.9M
2013: $22.2M
2014: $22.5M

Plus you have to add back the amortized bonus already associated with those player's current contracts. But I never counted that money in the first place. I am talking entirely about moving the cap hit associated with their salary.

Sure, Bob Kraft would love to hand out a $100,000,000 bonus.
Did you think about this at all? There are sooooo many problems with it.
1) If its a guarantee it counts toward this year
2) What you propose is that in order to pay a ridiculous amount of money to an OLB, you will now make the unprecedented move of GUARANRTEEING 5 years at $20mill to Tom Brady.
3) Ironically you guarantee 5 yrs at 50% more than the highest paid contract in the NFL to a guy who played 15 plays last year

 

[Ring 6]

On what basis do you make this claim?

The Haynesworth deal is an obvious counter example.

There is a provision that requires guaranteed money paid after 2012 to be counted against the 2009 cap. Is that what is causing the confusion?



Which part of the CBA is your understanding based on?

Future roster bonusses do not count against this years cap, but any guaranteed money does.

 

[Shockt327]

Just for reference, I think we should actually take a look at the Haynesworth deal just to see how manageable it really is.

1) A comparable deal will not ruin the franchise.
2) Peppers isn't in a position get what Haynesworth did.
3) Getting Peppers for a cap hit of 7-8 mil is pretty
reasonable. Certainly not "insane."

Note: Haynesworth will be cut or restructured before 2013. Those years are in red.


Year__Base__Signing __Option____Total Cap Hit
2009 $6.00__ $1.00___ ------____$7.00
2010 $3.60__ $5.20___ ------____$8.80
2011 $5.40__ $5.20___ ------____$10.60
2012 $6.70__ $5.20___ ------____$12.40
2013 $8.50__ $5.20___$20.50____$34.2
2014 $10.30_ $4.20___$0.50_____$15.0
2015 $11.50_ ------___$0.50_____$12.0

 

[Shockt327]

BTW my numbers on Haynesworth come from

http://www.thewarpath.net/WarpathRedskinsCap.htm

 

[solman]

Which part of the CBA is your understanding based on?

OK, I found a possible basis. Article XXIV Section 8(d) does provide that the 30% rule applies to options that can be exercised to extend the duration of a contract.

But there is a simple remedy. Use an option which does not extend the life of the contract. Article XXIV Section 7(b)(5)(iv) defines which amounts are treated as signing bonuses, and it includes all sorts of options. 8(d) uses much more narrow language.

 

[solman]

Sure, Bob Kraft would love to hand out a $100,000,000 bonus.
Did you think about this at all? There are sooooo many problems with it.
1) If its a guarantee it counts toward this year

I am referring to bonuses like the Haynesworth option bonus. Although numerous reports call it "guaranteed", the league still treats it as a signing bonus with amounts prorated in the year in which it is exercised.

2) What you propose is that in order to pay a ridiculous amount of money to an OLB, you will now make the unprecedented move of GUARANRTEEING 5 years at $20mill to Tom Brady.

3) Ironically you guarantee 5 yrs at 50% more than the highest paid contract in the NFL to a guy who played 15 plays last year

Tom Brady can negotiate for himself. If $100M is too much, maybe he'll take less.

The basic flexibility is there in the language of the CBA to get fancy with this. A $100M Haynesworth style option is the simplest possible example, but not necessarily the most appropriate.

[I'm going to have to leave soon]

 

[solman]

Future roster bonusses do not count against this years cap, but any guaranteed money does.

The Haynesworth guaranteed bonus of more than $20M in 2010 does not count against the cap.

The logic is probably that the league does not consider it to be guaranteed.

This is probably because it comprises two separate clauses. One that pays upon exercise and one that pays upon failure to exercise.

I'd very much like to see the contract and how it is worded, but there is some precedent for this cap treatment.

 

[solman]

Just for reference, I think we should actually take a look at the Haynesworth deal just to see how manageable it really is.

1) A comparable deal will not ruin the franchise.
2) Peppers isn't in a position get what Haynesworth did.
3) Getting Peppers for a cap hit of 7-8 mil is pretty
reasonable. Certainly not "insane."

Note: Haynesworth will be cut or restructured before 2013. Those years are in red.


Year__Base__Signing __Option____Total Cap Hit
2009 $6.00__ $1.00___ ------____$7.00
2010 $3.60__ $5.20___ ------____$8.80
2011 $5.40__ $5.20___ ------____$10.60
2012 $6.70__ $5.20___ ------____$12.40
2013 $8.50__ $5.20___$20.50____$34.2
2014 $10.30_ $4.20___$0.50_____$15.0
2015 $11.50_ ------___$0.50_____$12.0

I think the option bonus may be in the wrong year. I believe it is paid in 2010 and prorated from then. i don't have time to look it up before I go.

 

[solman]

I think the option bonus may be in the wrong year. I believe it is paid in 2010 and prorated from then. i don't have time to look it up before I go.

Scout.com: Full Breakdown of Haynesworth Contract

 

[Synovia]

Scout.com: Full Breakdown of Haynesworth Contract

Question on agent compensation:


Do agents get compensated on the (total) value of the contract, or the bonus, or just what they actually get paid?


Because if the agent is taking comission on 100M, and the deal is really 4 years 48M, Haynesworth is really getting screwed by his agent.

 

[Miguel]

Question on agent compensation:


Do agents get compensated on the (total) value of the contract, or the bonus, or just what they actually get paid?

Just on what they actually get paid.

 

[Miguel]

Salary:

2009: $1M
2010: $1.3M
2011: $1.6M
2012: $1.9M
2013: $2.2M
2014: $2.5M

2010 guaranteed option bonus: $100M

Annual cap hit:

2009: $1M
2010: $21.3M
2011: $21.6M
2012: $21.9M
2013: $22.2M
2014: $22.5M

Plus you have to add back the amortized bonus already associated with those player's current contracts. But I never counted that money in the first place. I am talking entirely about moving the cap hit associated with their salary.

Talk about misleading.

 

[Miguel]

Salary:

2009: $1M
2010: $1.3M
2011: $1.6M
2012: $1.9M
2013: $2.2M
2014: $2.5M

2010 guaranteed option bonus: $100M

Annual cap hit:

2009: $1M
2010: $21.3M
2011: $21.6M
2012: $21.9M
2013: $22.2M
2014: $22.5M

Plus you have to add back the amortized bonus already associated with those player's current contracts. But I never counted that money in the first place. I am talking entirely about moving the cap hit associated with their salary.

In other words, Brady is going to agree to reduce his 2009 salary by $4,000,000 in return for what amount of money in 2010. He is already due $6.5 million in 2010.

In other words, Light is going to agree to reduce his 2009 salary by $3,250,000 in return for what amount of money in 2010. He is already due $4.5 million in 2010.

In other words, Faulk is going to agree to reduce his 2009 salary by $1,900,000 in return for what amount of money in 2010. He is not due a thing in 2010.

 

[Miguel]

Right now Brady counts $14.6 million against the 2009 cap and $10.2 million against the 2010 cap. What will be his new numbers??

Right now Light counts $5.5 million against the 2009 cap and $4.5 million against the 2010 cap. What will be his new numbers??

Right now Faulk counts $4.4 million against the 2009 cap and $0 against the 2010 cap. What will be his new numbers??

If the Pats did not use the option bonus maneuver to reduce Randy Moss' 2009 cap charge, why would they then use it on Brady, Light and Faulk???